Varying Degrees of Denial

How ignorant can people be? How far over the edge can ideology drive a person? At what point does the collision between reality and rhetoric become unbearable? Well, we haven't gotten there yet...

Daily Kos insisted today that we are not fighting al Qaeda in Iraq - Iraq: Who Are We Fighting?

Cindy Sheehan, as Little Green Footballs noted, depicted al Qaeda terrorists as 'freedom fighters' and likened them to our founding fathers: Cindy Sheehan at Daily Kos: Al Qaeda = US Founding Fathers (note her repeated misspellings)

Granted, one would expect the liberal Daily Kos and the far left Cindy Sheehan to cast aspersions on the administration's (and the military's) claims and black and white evidence of al Qaeda in Iraq. But what excuse does journalist Dana Milbank have: "It's time to play the Qaeda card."

Powerline Blog digs deeper into Milbank's foolishness, and cites the New Republic's Lawrence Kaplan:

when Nancy Pelosi confessed last year that she felt "sad" about President Bush's claims that Al Qaeda operates in Iraq, she seemed to be disputing what every American soldier in Iraq, every Al Qaeda operative, and anyone who reads a newspaper already knew to be true. (When I questioned him about Pelosi's assertion, a U.S. officer in Ramadi responded, incredulously, that Al Qaeda had just held a parade in his sector.)

It is beyond my understanding how any American politician (or citizen) can casually or implicitly come to the defense, or deny the existence of such monsters: Holy Warriors Booby Trap Girls' School

However, some politicians have no qualms about betraying their allies, or a country to which we owe an obligation to help succeed. Only today, Clinton joins Byrd in move to 'deauthorize' Iraq War. Clearly, Democrats have found the need to further prove their commitment to the anti-war left, since their repeated attempts to withdraw have failed. They better work harder, because a lot of their base is not happy: Congressional Dems Deny The Obvious on Iraq Supplemental.

Tellingly, the liberal MyDD posted this headline yesterday: Not the Headline We Want on Iraq

That is not the only headline which strikes fear into the hearts of anti-war liberals. Any positive news from Iraq will begin to suck momentum that defeatist politicians feel they have made. The gains we have made in Iraq should be obvious, but not to Democrats, given the way in which they have blatantly ignored the recent progress in Iraq, such as all the terrorist leaders we've killed or captured, and or having lied about General Petraeus refusing to meet with them.

What Democrats fail to realize is that the path to victory will not be paved with the bones of Iraqi and American corpses. Despite their blistering critiques, Democrats have yet to offer an alternative. They have yet to answer who will have won if we leave Iraq. They have yet to acknowledge any positive developments, glossing over the turning of the Anbar Sheiks.

How can one combat such mendacity? Such sophism?

Elections have been won on charisma, on patriotism, on war, on victory, and on a positive vision for change. Success at the polls cannot be gained through dastardly political pandering and showmanship. The American people will see through the Democrats' shallow arguments.